RESEARCH ARTICLE Marine Reservoir Age Variability Over the Last 10.1029/2019PA003667 Deglaciation: Implications for Marine Carbon Key Points: • Significant, regionally consistent 14C Cycling and Prospects for Regional reservoir age changes occurred at middle and high latitudes across the Radiocarbon Calibrations last deglaciation L. C. Skinner1 , F. Muschitiello2, and A. E. Scrivner1 • Northern and southern R‐age patterns differ, underlining the role 1Godwin Laboratory for Palaeoclimate Research, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, of ocean circulation and/or sea ice 2 linked to the “bipolar seesaw” UK, Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK • Regional marine calibration curves are proposed as a viable means of improving marine radiocarbon Abstract Marine radiocarbon dates, corrected for ocean‐atmosphere reservoir age offsets (R‐ages), are calibration beyond the Holocene widely used to constrain marine chronologies. R‐ages also represent the surface boundary condition that links the ocean interior radiocarbon distribution (i.e., “radiocarbon ventilation ages”) to the ocean's Supporting Information: ‐ ‐ • Supporting Information S1 large scale overturning circulation. Understanding how R ages have varied over time is therefore essential • Table S1 both for accurate dating and for investigations into past ocean circulation/carbon cycle interactions. A number or recent studies have shed light on surface reservoir age changes over the last deglaciation; however, a clear picture of global/regional spatiotemporal patterns of variability has yet to emerge. Here we Correspondence to: combine new and existing reservoir age estimates to show coherent but distinct regional reservoir age trends L. C. Skinner, [email protected] in the subpolar North Atlantic and Southern Ocean. It can be further shown that similar but lower amplitude changes occurred at midlatitudes in each hemisphere. An apparent link between regional patterns of reservoir age variability and the “thermal bipolar seesaw” suggests a causal link with changes Citation: ‐ Skinner, L. C., Muschitiello, F., & in ocean circulation, mixed layer depth, and/or sea ice dynamics. A further link to atmospheric CO2 is Scrivner, A. E. (2019). Marine reservoir also apparent and underlines a potentially dominant role for changes in the ocean's “disequilibrium carbon” age variability over the last pool, rather than changes in ocean transport, in deglacial CO change. The existence of significant R‐age deglaciation: Implications for marine 2 carbon cycling and prospects for variability over the last deglaciation poses a problem for marine radiocarbon age calibrations. However, its regional radiocarbon calibrations. apparent regional consistency also raises the prospect of developing region‐specific marine calibration Paleoceanography and curves for radiocarbon‐dating purposes. Paleoclimatology, 34. https://doi.org/ 10.1029/2019PA003667 Plain Language Summary Radiocarbon is widely used to date ancient fossil material, including marine shells, reaching back to ~40,000 years. Less well known, is its use as a marine carbon cycle tracer. Received 22 MAY 2019 Accepted 31 OCT 2019 Both of these applications require knowledge of how the surface ocean's radiocarbon activity has changed Accepted article online 19 NOV 2019 over time, which presents a serious challenge. In this study, we demonstrate that the polar regions of the Atlantic Ocean have experienced significant changes in their radiocarbon activity. These are linked to both regional climate change and atmospheric CO2 fluctuations, and thus serve to emphasize the important role of processes acting at the sea surface, including sea ice variability in particular, in controlling the heat and carbon storage in the ocean. At the same time, by demonstrating regional consistency of marine radiocarbon trends, our results open up the possibility of improved radiocarbon dating of marine material in future. 1. Introduction Radiocarbon is widely used as a dating tool and as a hydrographic‐ and carbon‐cycle tracer in paleoceano- graphy. However, prior knowledge of the spatial and temporal variability of radiocarbon activity in the ocean's mixed layer (hereafter the “surface ocean”) is crucial for both of these applications. For radiocarbon dating, marine radiocarbon ages must be calibrated to calendar ages using a detailed history of atmospheric ©2019. The Authors. “ ” This is an open access article under the radiocarbon activity variability and, therefore, corrected for their offset from contemporary atmospheric terms of the Creative Commons radiocarbon ages (i.e., their “reservoir age”) prior to calibration. Alternatively, a global average reservoir Attribution License, which permits use, age, along with estimates of regional deviations from this average, can be used to “correct” atmospheric distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is radiocarbon ages instead, effectively providing a marine calibration curve. For studies that deploy radiocar- properly cited. bon as a hydrographic‐ or carbon‐cycle tracer, the “reservoir age” of a parcel of water becomes the metric of SKINNER ET AL. 1 Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology 10.1029/2019PA003667 interest in itself. Thus the degree of radiocarbon isotopic equilibration between a parcel of water and the contemporary atmosphere (whether in the mixed layer or the deep ocean interior) will in general reflect three main components: a component due to air‐sea gas exchange efficiency and carbon turnover time in the mixed layer; a component due to the transit time from the mixed layer to the water parcel's location in the ocean interior; and a component due to the mixing of different water sources with different dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) concentrations, different transit times from the mixed layer, and different initial mixed‐ layer radiocarbon activities. The mixed‐layer “reservoir age” therefore represents the surface boundary condition that uniquely links the ocean interior radiocarbon field to the ocean's transport field (e.g., Koeve Figure 1. Locations for R‐age records included in this study. Black‐filled cir- et al., 2015). If we wish to obtain accurately calibrated radiocarbon dates cle indicates the location of the new record from MD04‐2929 (this study; for chronologies, and if we wish to infer past ocean transports from ocean 58o56.93′N, 9o34.3′W; 1743 m); white circles indicate the locations of sur- interior radiocarbon data, we need to know how surface reservoir ages face R‐age records from the Atlantic and Southern Ocean that have been have evolved over time. collated in this study. White stars indicate the locations of other sites that are referred to in the text. Shading indicates modern prebomb surface ocean R‐ A number or recent studies have shed light on surface reservoir age age averaged over 100–200‐m water depth (Key et al., 2004). changes over the last deglaciation (Peck et al., 2006; Sikes et al., 2016; Skinner et al., 2010; Skinner et al., 2015; Thornalley et al., 2011; Waelbroeck et al., 2001); however, a clear picture of global/regional spatiotemporal patterns of variability has yet to emerge. Such a picture is likely to be regionally heterogeneous. Here we combine new and existing reservoir age estimates to show coherent but distinct regional reservoir age trends in the subpolar North Atlantic and Southern Ocean, which exhibit diminished amplitude at lower latitudes. This contrasts with the patterns expected due to a “passive ocean” response to changing atmospheric radiocarbon activity (i.e., where the ocean's radiocarbon activity is only driven by the atmosphere's and not vice versa), indicating the involvement of climate and marine carbon cycle change, with an apparent connection to the “thermal bipolar seesaw.” Finally, we discuss the implications of these findings for marine radiocarbon age calibra- tions and raise the possibility of developing region‐specific marine calibration curves in order to address emerging challenges for radiocarbon dating of marine sequences in a context of significant and regionally heterogeneous reservoir age variability. 2. Material and Methods Radiocarbon dates have been performed on monospecificsamplesofNeogloboquadrina pachyderma (left coil- ing, s) from North Atlantic sediment core MD04‐2829CQ (58°56.93′N, 9°34.3′W; 1,743 m; MD141 SEQUOIA), recovered from the same location as sediment core DAPC2 (Knutz et al., 2007) on the Rosemary Bank in the northern Rockall Trough (Figure 1). The chronostratigraphy of MD04‐2829CQ is based on the alignment of changes in the abundance of the polar planktonic foraminifer species N. pachyderma (s), relative to the total number of grains in the >150‐μm size fraction (Nps%), to regional temperature anomalies inferred from the 18 North Greenland Ice Core Project (NGRIP) ice‐core δ Oice record (Figure 2), yielding ages on the GICC05 ice‐core chronology (Svensson et al., 2008). No correction has been made for the 50‐year offset between GICC05 “b2k” ages and “BP” ages, though this level of precision is likely overwhelmed by the much larger uncertainties in correlative ages and radiocarbon dates. The uncertainty in age‐tie points is thus conservatively estimated at ~200 years based on the duration of the correlative events and the uncertainty of the GICC05 age scale. These tie points are used to derive a sediment age‐depth model using BChron (Parnell et al., 2008), which deploys a Bayesian statistical approach to obtain “best guess” and confidence